logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.02.03 2016나2067609
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the 4th part of the transfer contract of this case as stated in Article 6 subparagraph 4 of the transfer contract of this case as stated in the fourth part of the judgment of the court of the first instance is "written confirmation"; and (b) the plaintiff's decision on the plaintiff's argument in the trial is as stated in the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance, except for adding the judgment on the plaintiff's argument as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is citing

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion in the trial room

A. As to the Plaintiff’s first argument, the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are asserted in the grounds of appeal.

(1) First of all, the Plaintiff asserts that the intent of the parties indicated in the instant written confirmation is merely that the amount exceeding KRW 500,000,000,000,000,000 for the acquisition price of the right to implement the project, out of the down payment under the instant transfer contract, should be borne by the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff did not intend to reduce the penalty if the transfer contract is terminated

(2) The judgment of the court below is based on the Plaintiff’s assertion that the contents of the instant written confirmation (the amount exceeding KRW 500 million in the real estate sales contract with F explicitly stated that the Plaintiff would be deducted from the down payment to be paid from the Defendant according to the instant transfer contract) and the details of the Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the refund of KRW 500 million as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s agent at the time of the conclusion of the instant transfer contract would not necessarily conclude the instant transfer contract by pressureing the Defendant’s agent to not return KRW 500 million from the down payment that was paid on the ground that the initial project cost exceeded the predetermined amount due to the increase of KRW 500 million in the purchase price of the real estate sales contract with F at the time of the conclusion of the instant transfer contract, and that the excess of the purchase price would be deducted from the balance of the transfer price, notwithstanding Article

arrow